| ASPECTS | DETAILS |
| Case Title | Supreme Court overrules immunity for MPs, MLA’s in bribery cases |
| Introduction | The Supreme Court nullified the immunity granted to MPs and MLAs in bribery cases related to their votes and speeches in legislative houses. |
| Factual Background | A seven-judge bench, led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, overturned the 1998 verdict that had shielded lawmakers from prosecution for accepting bribes. |
| Legal Issues | The key issue was whether parliamentary privileges extended to granting immunity to lawmakers for accepting bribes, particularly concerning votes and speeches in legislative sessions. |
| Applicable Law | The Prevention of Corruption Act and constitutional provisions such as Articles 105 and 194 were crucial. The court evaluated the nexus between parliamentary privileges and legislative bodies. |
| Analysis | The Supreme Court emphasized that corruption undermines public life’s integrity, and parliamentary privileges should not shield lawmakers from accountability for bribery. |
| Conclusions | The seven-judge bench unanimously ruled that MPs and MLAs could not claim immunity from prosecution in bribery cases related to their votes and speeches in Parliament or state legislatures. |
| Current Scenario | The verdict signifies a significant shift in legal precedent, establishing a clear boundary between parliamentary privileges and accountability in bribery cases involving lawmakers. |
CASE SUMMARY: The Supreme Court, led by a seven-judge bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, revoked the immunity granted to MPs and MLAs in bribery cases concerning their actions within legislative houses. Overruling the 1998 verdict, the court emphasized that corruption erodes public probity and parliamentary privileges should not shield lawmakers from accountability. The decision underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and combating corruption within the legislative framework.
